Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 20:59 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 20:59
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 6,216
Own Kudos:
6,185
 [1]
Given Kudos: 44
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,216
Kudos: 6,185
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Dereno
Joined: 22 May 2020
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,398
Own Kudos:
1,373
 [1]
Given Kudos: 425
Products:
Posts: 1,398
Kudos: 1,373
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
sunet233
Joined: 12 Nov 2025
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 6
Given Kudos: 539
Location: India
Schools: Wharton '26
GPA: 3.5
Schools: Wharton '26
Posts: 6
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 6,216
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 44
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,216
Kudos: 6,185
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ExpertsGlobal5
Company M has two divisions- X and Y. Both the divisions have exactly two types of employees - operators and executives. Is the ratio of number of operators to executives greater for division X than for division Y?

(1) The ratio of operators to executives for the division X is less than that for the company M.
(2) The ratio of operators to executives for the division Y is greater than that for the company M.

Explanation:

Statement (1)

If the ratio (of operators to executives) for the division X is less than the ratio for the two sections combined, it means that the ratio for section Y must be greater.
Hence, we can deduce that “No, the ratio of number of operators to executives is NOT greater for division X than for division Y”.
Sufficient.

Statement (2)

If the ratio (of operators to executives) for the division Y is greater than the ratio for the two sections combined, it means that the ratio for section X must be lesser.
Hence, we can deduce that “No, the ratio of number of operators to executives is NOT greater for division X than for division Y”.
Sufficient.

Each statement alone is sufficient.

D is the correct answer choice.
User avatar
Edskore
Joined: 29 Dec 2022
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 273
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 273
Kudos: 128
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Answer: D — both statements are individually sufficient. The core concept being tested here is the Weighted Average Seesaw, one of the most important ideas in GMAT Data Sufficiency.

The logic works like this: when you combine two groups, the combined ratio (the "company average") is always between the two individual ratios. It's a weighted average. If one group is below the combined average, the other group must be above it to balance things out. There's no way both can be below (or both above) the overall average at the same time.

Statement (1): X's ratio < Company M's ratio
This tells us X is below the combined average. By the seesaw logic, Y must be above it. So X < Company M < Y, which directly answers the question — No, X's ratio is NOT greater than Y's. Sufficient.

Statement (2): Y's ratio > Company M's ratio
This tells us Y is above the combined average. By the same logic, X must be below it. So X < Company M < Y — again the answer is No. Sufficient.

Each statement alone is sufficient → Answer D.

The common trap here: students try to test with actual numbers and run into algebra, then get confused about whether it's always true or just sometimes true. If you recognize the weighted average constraint upfront, you never need to plug numbers — the conclusion follows immediately from the structure.

Takeaway: Whenever a DS question gives you information about a subgroup's ratio relative to the combined group's ratio, the Weighted Average Seesaw tells you the other subgroup's position immediately.
Moderators:
Math Expert
109785 posts
498 posts
212 posts